MADHAB BAIRAGI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief;

(2.) The facts of the case are that the father of the Petitioner, Late Deba Bairagi, was a work charged Khalasi under the administrative control of the Chief Construction Engineer, Upper Kolab Project, Bariniput in the District of Koraput (Opposite Party No.3). As per order dtd. 1/10/2010 passed by the Office of the Engineering in Chief, Water Resources, Odisha, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.2) pursuant to the decision of the Government vide Notification dtd. 28/2/2009, the NMR employees like the Petitioner's father were brought over to the work charged establishment w.e.f. 1/3/2009 on certain terms and conditions. Accordingly, the Opposite Party No.3 was directed to take necessary action. The matter was however kept pending, for reasons unknown, in the office of the Opposite Party No.3 till as late as 17/4/2011 on which the date, the formal order bringing over the Petitioner's father (and other employees) to the work charged establishment was issued. But as ill-luck would have it, the Petitioner's father died just four days prior to issuance of such order i.e. on 13/4/2011. The Petitioner being unemployed submitted an application for appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme to the Opposite Party No.3. The same was forwarded along the relevant documents to the Opposite Party No.2 for necessary action. Since no action was taken on the application, the Petitioner approached the erstwhile Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.2470(C)/2016 which was transferred to this Court and registered as W.P.C.(OAC) No.2470/2016. By order dtd. 6/9/2022, this Court directed the concerned authority to consider the claim of the Petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Tribunal in another case being O.A. No.4619/2011. In the said order passed in respect of the applicant, Kalpana Aich, learned Tribunal under similar facts directed the authorities to treat the deceased employee as work charged employee as on 1/3/2009 and to extend all benefits as admissible to such employees including appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in favour of the applicant.

(3.) Heard Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. I. Mohanty, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.